Harvard committee considers radical grading system changes

A report recommending Harvard College radically change its numerical grading scale and overhaul its honors system to combat grade inflation was debated in a closed meeting of the Committee on Undergraduate Education (CUE) yesterday.

After months of debate and discussion among the faculty, the Educational Policy Committee (EPC) drafted the report based on the reviews of grading practices that each department had submitted in February.

The recommendations — which include possibly eliminating honors tracks in concentrations and adding statistical information to student transcripts — will likely be discussed by the entire Faculty at a meeting in May.

Dean of Undergraduate Education Susan Pedersen called the proposal a "draft" last night.

The recommendations include reducing the current 15-point grading scale to an eight-point scale, with equal numerical differences between each grade. This would eliminate C-minus, D-plus and D-minus grades.

This change aims to remove the "skip" between an A-minus and a B-plus, which represent a 14 and a 12, respectively, on the current grading scale.

Since there would be less of a numerical difference between an A-minus and a B-plus, this change would make professors more willing to give students B-range grades, the report argues.

According to the report, eliminating lower range grades would better define each remaining grade "and communicate more effectively with students the shortcomings of their work."

The report also recommends that the percent of A-range grades earned in a course be included in a student's transcript alongside the student's grade in the class.

With this addition, the transcript would "provide greater transparency in our grading practices and allow for others independently to assess the value of a given grade," according to the report.

Students and faculty on the CUE declined to comment on the report yesterday.

The report also addressed the issue of honors, which has been one of the most hotly-debated topics in the faculty this semester.

Get the best of the ‘Prince’ delivered straight to your inbox. Subscribe now »

The EPC's report also explicitly criticized the oft-proposed solution of raising the GPA cutoff for honors.

According to the report, raising the cutoff would "discourage 'average' students from attempting a more challenging program . . . and may simply increase the pressure [on professors] to give magna-level grades and thesis readings."

Instead, the committee proposed eliminating honors concentrations and honors tracks. Under the new system each concentration would define one set of standards that all concentrators would have to meet.Departments would recommend candidates for honors and the College would then award honors based on GPA cutoffs and distribution requirements.

Under the proposal, each department would decide whether to require a thesis of all or none of its concentrators — although this would "involve additional faculty time and would likely increase the number of unsuccessful or indifferent theses."

A second proposal for honors reform would further separate departmental honors from honors awarded by the College. College and departmental honors do currently compose two separate categories, but, under this proposal, they would be distinct in both name and practice — College honors would no longer take departmental recommendations into consideration.